99+ (WJ) intake swap belt question - JeepForum.com
Search  
Sign Up   Today's Posts
User: Pass: Remember?
Advertise Here
Jeep Home Jeep Forum Jeep Classifieds Jeep Registry JeepSpace Jeep Reviews Jeep Gallery Jeep Clubs Jeep Groups Jeep Videos Jeep Events Jeep Articles
Go Back JeepForum.com > Models > Jeep Grand Cherokee & Commander Forums > ZJ Grand Cherokee Forum > 99+ (WJ) intake swap belt question

TeraFlex Now at Rockridge 4WD! BEST DEALS around!Alloy usa heavy duty ball joint kitsENGO QUADLUX 6" to 54" LED AMBER AND WHITE MULTI

Reply
Unread 11-15-2013, 01:19 PM   #1
zjosh93
Registered User
1993 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 1,251
93-95 ZJ with 99+ (WJ) intake swap belt question

I'm swapping a 99+ intake onto my 93 in about a week. My power steering pump is leaking and if I need to buy a rebuilt pump I'm just going to buy a 96-99 pump and turn in my 93 pump as the core. I already have the PS bracket and bolts for the 99 intake. I also might have a little crack in my twice-welded header so I'll probably re-re-weld that too. Welds seem to last about three years and I'm ok with that. I'm going to drill out all the fittings on the 99 intake and tap the holes 1/4" NPT so I can reuse all my 93 fittings. I have a spare set of 93-95 fittings. I'm going to put 1/4" NPT to 1/4" inverted flare fittings on the outer two side holes and bend up some 1/4" hard line to reach back where the MAP and CCV lines end so I don't need to extend any rubber vacuum lines. I already have 703 injectors.

After reading all the posts about the swap it seems pretty straight forward. My question is about the belt. It looks like most people remove the idler pulley under the AC compressor and run a 96-98 belt. Any reason not to just leave that pulley in place and run a longer belt. The stock 93 belt is 97.2 inches and longer belts are common. I'd like to keep that idler to maintain the extra belt wrap on the AC comp and alternator.

Thanks

zjosh93 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 11-15-2013, 02:48 PM   #2
riot1987
Professional Wise Guy
 
riot1987's Avatar
1997 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Lakewood, COLORADO
Posts: 3,650
I kept all my existing pulleys and went with a different sized belt. No Issues. Cant remember the length though. I bought like 6 belts and returned all the ones that didnt fit lol
__________________
http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f22/riots-97-grand-1436100/

Build thread^^
riot1987 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 11-15-2013, 03:13 PM   #3
zjosh93
Registered User
1993 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 1,251
Alright, excellent. I was pretty sure it would work but I didn't see anyone doing it or a suggested belt length so I was worried that there was some weird Jeep gotcha that made it impossible to just buy a longer belt. Didn't want to get everything swapped out and discover a problem with the last step.
zjosh93 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 11-15-2013, 07:00 PM   #4
WhiteOut
Web Wheeler
 
WhiteOut's Avatar
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 8,167
The 93-95 PS pumps differ from the 96-98 pumps On the earlier ones, the pulley is set back about half an inch from where the 96-98 one sits. The difference is enough to shred the belt.
WhiteOut is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 11-15-2013, 08:01 PM   #5
zjosh93
Registered User
1993 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 1,251
I was under the impression that by changing my 93 pump and bracket out for the 96-98 pump and bracket that the power steering pump pulley would line up with the rest of the belt drive. As I mentioned in my first post my power steering pump is leaking from the rear seal so I'm going to trade it in as the core for a 96-98 pump. I already have the 96-98 bracket to match it and I will just reuse my old power steering pump pulley on the new pump. It looks to me that the new power steering idler and bracket add about an inch or less to the belt so finding a longer belt shouldn't be an issue.
zjosh93 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 12-08-2013, 06:36 PM   #6
zjosh93
Registered User
1993 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 1,251
I installed my 99+ intake yesterday and I discovered why no one keeps the third idler in the swap. The idler nearest and to the right of the alternator adds a lot of belt wrap the the alternator in the 93-95 routing but the later model routing reverses the belt arrangement on the water pump and crank pulleys. On the 93-95 the belt routes to the left of the water pump and the right of the crank: on the later models it routes to the right of the water pump and the left of the crank. The up shot is the the belt going from the bottom of the crank to the alt in the 93-95 routing changes to come from the top of the water pump. This gives the alternator plenty of wrap. It looks like if you left the third idler the belt would interfere with the AC idler. On the later setup there is about 3/4 between the belt and the AC idler; without actually trying it looks like the third idler would move the belt up about that much. The additional pulley wouldn't add that much more wrap to the alternator at that point; maybe another 5-10 degrees. Certainly not worth the added complexity or extra failure point. I just bought a 97 4.0 belt and it all works perfectly.
zjosh93 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 12-08-2013, 07:04 PM   #7
zander21510
Lord of Retro Machines
 
zander21510's Avatar
1995 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 1,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteOut View Post
The 93-95 PS pumps differ from the 96-98 pumps On the earlier ones, the pulley is set back about half an inch from where the 96-98 one sits. The difference is enough to shred the belt.
I don't think that's correct. I did the swap with my original 93 pump with 96-98 brackets and it lines up perfectly.

If you just use all 96+ parts, you shouldn't have a problem. You can find some good info on the swap in my signature
zander21510 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 12-08-2013, 07:14 PM   #8
WhiteOut
Web Wheeler
 
WhiteOut's Avatar
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 8,167
The alignment issues I ran into were on a 5.2, so it might be different on the 4.0
WhiteOut is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 12-08-2013, 07:20 PM   #9
zjosh93
Registered User
1993 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 1,251
Yep, I used all the 96+ stuff including buying a new pump to replace my bad original pump. With the 96+ belt it all worked fine even though I reused my old pump pulley and an older sized pulley for the adjuster. The 93-95 uses two 3" idler pulleys but the newer set up uses a 3.5" pulley on the adjuster. With the belt properly tensioned the adjuster was in the center of its range so it all worked out. I'm going to watch for any odd belt wear but the pump pulley alignment seems good. I may buy the correct adjuster pulley and pump pulley after the holidays.

My intake install is here: http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f13/9...ution-1867410/
zjosh93 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the JeepForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid e-mail address for yourself.
Note: All free e-mails have been banned due to mis-use. (Yahoo, Gmail, Hotmail, etc.)
Don't have a non-free e-mail address? Click here for a solution: Manual Account Creation
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Thread Tools






Jeep, Wrangler, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and other models are copyrighted and trademarked to Jeep/Chrysler Corporation. JeepForum.com is not in any way associated with Jeep or the Chrysler Corp.